Thus far, the Chief Justice, Judicial Council and the AOC have derided AB1208 legislation. They’ve trotted out new and improved mouthpieces you’ve not seen before to scare you and everyone else into believing that feudalism is just one piece of legislation away.
What they have not done is come out with the specific reasons they oppose the bill, which would be the starting point on coming to the table on issues that might make this bill unnecessary. Rather, they and their supporters wish to take it off the fast track and make it a two year bill so they have ample opportunity to kill the legislation. Legislation that does nothing more than redefine the JC/AOC’s responsibilities to the trial courts that the failed to act upon some 14 years ago.
They also want to know what everyone sees is wrong with the Judicial Council and the AOC as if they were clueless , as if there was nothing wrong, as if none of the many issues brought to the foreground by bloggers like AOC Watcher and Judicial Council Watcher, the whistleblowers or the ACJ exist. ALL MEDIA wants to know the ugly truth of what the judiciary sees in the Judicial Council/AOC through their own eyes, even if it was an an anonymous compilation of comments that was released to us.
In case you’re wondering, the Judicial Council and the AOC don’t really read us. After all, who has time to read the midnight rantings of a bunch of people in their pajamas? I mean, besides the 28 or so county courts that have confirmed to us they read, the legislative aides who tell us that they read, the judges and justices that tell us that they read, the other media organizations that tell us they read and we’re syndicated in whole or in part to 69 other outlets, where we’re sure that no one from the Judicial Council or the AOC reads us.
The AOC is currently trying to collect as much information as they can from as many parties as they can regarding specific deficiencies or allegations against the AOC and JC, promising that somewhere along the way, your name will be seperated from your opinion. In some cases, they are using court CEO’s (that they believe are in their pocket) to circumvent the PJ’s and collect this information and that’s going over just swell in some courts.
Most of those responding in my private message window or email are both insulted and incensed. Court workers and judges alike tell me that their judges have “judge stuff” to do and don’t have time to respond to an inane request from the AOC that will only permit them to build a political hit list. Court workers writing us are universally incensed that the Chief Justice, the Judicial Council, the leadership of the AOC and in some cases, their own courts leadership and their unions are not doing more or speaking out louder while they stare down an AOC created gun barrel at their careers.
If the Judicial Council, the AOC or their supporters had any intent on discussing any point of AB1208 it would consist of sincere dialog now as opposed to fear mongering and tactical delay. Tactical delay? We’re being told on Tuesday, April 19th the leadership of the CJA and the die-hard supporters of the AOC will meet again in a valiant, last-ditch effort to get two year bill language into the letter to Calderon regardless of their memberships desire to remain neutral on the issue of AB1208. Additionally, we read from Nathaniel Woodhull that somehow this bill may have been pushed over to the Judiciary committee – an unconfirmed report. CJA’s leadership and AOC supporters wish drive a wedge between the two organizations and let the voice of the judiciary continue to offer social gatherings and pet insurance while everybody pretends nothing is wrong. They seem to want to let the ACJ do all the dirty work and heavy lifting while taking credit for whatever happens either way as the voice of the judiciary.
Our advice to CJA’s Herman, Davis & Company?
Give it up.
Change the direction that the gun barrel is pointing from pointing at the careers of your dedicated workforce and point that gun barrel back at the Judicial Council and the AOC.
If they eliminated only waste and corruption, future layoffs might be unnecessary. If they had been transparent and accountable, past layoffs would have been unnecessary as they might have qualified for substantial federal funding.
Funding they intentionally walked away from rather than be either transparent or accountable.
I won’t back down.
Will you?
Jon Wintermeyer
April 16, 2011
The leadership of the CC Court obviously doesn’t care. There are even memebers of their bench listed as signatures that oppose the AB1208 and it makes me wonder what are they thinking, or did they forget what was done for remodel work by their own Facilities Director from 2003 to 2009.
They had proof positive within their own court, that with an MOU and Trial Court monies (from the CA Taxpayers) allotted to me from the AOC (by their ERS unit and former PM Tiffany Martindale), that I could perform remodels at a fraction of the cost of the AOC standard methods used by the AOC’s FMU and their third party vendor Team Jacobs complete with multiple layers of subcontract project managers and trades contractors.
If I could create service work orders that I was willing to Project Manage and submitt them to the AOC, in spring of 2009 there were over thirty submitted. These SWO’s were complete with photos, sketches and detailed written description of what the projects consisted off and why they were being requested by the CC Court.
These were seriously needed projects, like concrete sidewalks with open cracks and lifted edges and paved driveways and parking lots full of large pot holes that were tripping hazards and safety issues. There were building roofs that required replacement and HVAC equipment that was held together with duct tape and wire to stay operational. There were ADA code issues for missing automatic door operators. The security issues of an adequate building entry space for X-ray machines and walk-through metal dectors and sheriff staff space that allowed the public to enter without having to be in a crowed line up that would not allowed the exterior doors to close. In the Richmond Court the entry and exit doors for the attorneys and public are side by side, with a partition wall attached to a center metal post to separate two traffic paths.
To date there has only been one completed that I saw finished by the AOC. But you can bet if the AOC FMU were asked what amount of trial courts funds remain in the CC Court pot, the answer would be none, it was used instead to pay the invoices on the many SWO’s submitted by Team Jacobs that resulted in light bulb changes and other little FMU authorized projects.
wendy darling
April 16, 2011
Sad, but true.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
April 16, 2011
Forget believing that cj microminimimi is going to do the right thing — and when I say that, I mean as the “right thing” was so perfectly if shockingly illustrated in JCW’s April Fool’s post.
At this point, don’t we all know that the cj, the JC, the AOC and their cheerleaders have a track record of supporting bad behavior, feathering their own nests, and punishing and discrediting whistleblowers, notwithstanding very pretty propaganda videos posted on youtube, with the comment feature conveniently disabled?
THAT IS AN INTENTIONALLY PROVOCATIVE QUERY. I am sure many good judges, Judicial Council members and court employees do NOT like being lumped with branch baddies. . . . .but the fact is, like George before her, mini-mimi is ruining the already compromised reputation and credibility of EVERYONE in the branch as a) historically ethically compromised people (like Kim Turner) are placed in positions of power and oversight, and b) the cj and her minions move forward with RG’s plans to create an untouchable, unaccountable, unrestrained, empire.
Some have predicted that given the inexperience, in-your-face arrogance and foot-stomping temperament the new cj has already publicly displayed, left unrestrained, she is going to make Ron George look like a pussycat. So all those worried about handing over personal information to cj mini-mimi’s close advisor Kim Turner should be very worried about a blacklist being compiled. . . . .and used in the same brutal manner Turner’s Marin blacklist was used.
The branch cannot afford two more years of the status quo, or mini-mimi’s “stubborn” shove-it-down-your-throat tactics gleefully enforced by her trusty CEO-generals (Turner, Roddy, Torre, etc.), dressed up with delay tactics like empty offers to join committees and speak civilly.
The handwriting is on the wall, and has been for a long time. That is why the branch is in such a state of utter public disgrace. And that is why more and more court critics are surfacing and mobilizing – in the public, and within the branch—and will continue to surface and mobilize, unless things change, drastically, and quickly.
The ACJ and the legislature have made reasonable change possible—now trial judges, court employees and others have to use their voice, or lose it, via support for 1208 (confirming trial court rights promised back in 1997), and a demand for democratization of the Judicial Council.
wendy darling
April 16, 2011
Given Judge Woodhull’s Friday post that on Thursday, AB1208 was removed to the legislature’s Judiciary Committee, chaired by Mike Feuer (remember him – the “ghost” Legislative representative to the Judicial Council who didn’t attend council meetings), chances are good that AB 1208 won’t even get much of a hearing, if it gets one at all.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
April 16, 2011
Feuer is a JC member and conflicted spouse of a certain SoCal judge. Of course he is (and has been criticized for) towing the corrupted party line.
But consider this. The Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously voted to rename the SF appellate/supreme court building after Ron George, but, after an avalanche of negative calls to the Assembly Judiciary Committee (even though it was chaired by Feuer), that measure was killed.
Let’s remember who had a say in what happened.
JCW, perhaps the judges cannot do it, but some of us can. Time to call in the troops?
I will unabashedly say that great court personnel– professional court reporters and clerks who interface with the public every single day; who accurately and correctly document the court’s business; and who otherwise pleasantly and honestly serve the public, can make or break the reputation and public perception of a court. The Turners and Torres of the branch– who HAVE BEEN AND ARE BEING REWARDED BY TOP LEADERSHIP for reportedly a) doing WHATEVER it takes to cover up/shred/destroy/alter any evidence of genuine branch misconduct; b) identifying/firing /laying off/ furloughing honest court employees who are serving the public, rather than top leadership’s “party line”; and c) acting as well-placed JC /AOC power-monger “enforcers”, who disempower and neutralize (take down?) ethical trial court bench members– are destroying the branch at its trial court roots.
Current and former branch members, employees, union members, and their families and friends should step forward, and deluge the Assembly Judiciary Committee in support of AB 1208. Just pick up the phone, or write an e-mail and send it.
Power to the people.
Committee Members District Phone E-mail
Mike Feuer – Chair Dem-42 (916) 319-2042 Assemblymember.Feuer@assembly.ca.gov
Donald P. Wagner – Vice Chair Rep-70 (916) 319-2070 Assemblymember.Wagner@assembly.ca.gov
Toni Atkins Dem-76 (916) 319-2076 Assemblymember.Atkins@assembly.ca.gov
Roger Dickinson Dem-9 (916) 319-2009 Assemblymember.Dickinson@assembly.ca.gov
Jeff Gorell Rep-37 (916) 319-2037 Assemblymember.Gorell@assembly.ca.gov
Alyson Huber Dem-10 (916) 319-2010 Assemblymember.Huber@assembly.ca.gov
Jared Huffman Dem-6 (916) 319-2006 Assemblymember.Huffman@assembly.ca.gov
Brian W. Jones Rep-77 (916) 319-2077 Assemblymember.Jones@assembly.ca.gov
William W. Monning Dem-27 (916) 319-2027 Assemblymember.Monning@assembly.ca.gov
Bob Wieckowski Dem-20 (916) 319-2020 Assemblymember.Wieckowski@asm.ca.gov
JusticeCalifornia
April 16, 2011
I want to add bailiffs to my last post. Gotta love and respect good court bailiffs who respect and serve the law, rather than the corrupt powers that be. They exist, and witness, in each and every county.
I remember one honorable bailiff, who, many years ago, after watching egregious and obvious Marin bench misconduct, about which I was LOUDLY and some would say dangerously complaining, approached counsel table and, with his back turned to the bench, quietly , wisely, and correctly whispered “don’t do this right now”. I took his advice.
One Who Knows
April 16, 2011
If you check at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov you can check the status of AB 1208. The status as of 4/14 is that AB 1208 is set for a hearing by the assembly accountability committee on 4/27. It is likely that the bill has now been double referred to also be heard by the judiciary committee since Assembly Member Feuer, as the chair has asked that it also be referred to his committee. So the bill will have two policy hearings as opposed to just one. Two hearings are undesirable – just another hurdle to get over….
JusticeCalifornia
April 17, 2011
Thank you for the information, and everyone available should either call/write in advance or show up at the 4/27 hearing.
Two hearings could be viewed as two opportunities. Feuer is a known judicial wife with major personal conflict of interest issues. In trying to protect/further his own political/legal career, and his spouse’s judicial career, his interference with long-promised and appropriate branch independence, at the horrific expense of the public he serves, may well be his undoing. His SoCal public “hearing” about the judiciary was a disaster for him and those who appeared with him.
And look at Corbett, a longtime RG enthusiast who has long since lost her gloss.
These times, they are a changing.
Given top leadership’s longtime egregious and oppressive track record, it’s hip to be square.
Michael Paul
April 17, 2011
From what I have read thus far, there is no truth in the arguments put forth by the Judicial Council, the AOC or their supporters who see AB1208 as a backwards step in governance. The rules of court are established by the Judicial Council. Generally, everyone follows the rules of court and an effort can be made to ensure that practice is the same from judicial district to judicial district, overcoming some attorneys objections.
Another objection attorneys seem to have is online filing or online review of cases. The AOC has some lofty plans for charging you for accessing that electronic law library they plan to deploy – an electronic law library that would be the ultimate in government subsidies to the legal profession while being a burden to the courts and a barrier to access to justice for those who don’t have a credit card. I have to wonder, if a CCMS access fee was charged with ones’ bar membership with the intent to undo this generous subsidy to the legal profession, would they be touting the importance of paying up to 3 billion dollars for it?
Steps towards democracy are never backwards. They’re rarely pretty. They’re always necessary.
Nathaniel Woodhull
April 17, 2011
I have been told that the Administrative Committee will have hearings on the bill, but as pointed out by Hope This Helps above, the 4/27 date was the first possible date. Chances are that date is going to be the first two weeks of May…keep checking the Legislative site for update. I’m getting conflicting data on whether or not Feuer is or has been successful in moving the bill to Judiciary, despite the fact that the AOC/CJA and Feuer are really hot to move it there, claiming that Administrative should not be hearing such a bill. It may, as was pointed out by One Who Knows, that they are trying to get Rules to agree the bill should go through both Committees. The Daily Journal article saying it was moved has only been verified by an officer on the CJA Board, not sure how reliable.
One Who Knows
April 17, 2011
If you go to the website I referred to earlier the status of AB 1208 indicates that AB 1208 is scheduled in the accountability committee on 4/27. Other bill tracking systems show the same. However, the author can decide to not have the bill heard on that day. But if the bill is double
referred, it is likely that the hearing will not be rescheduled because of other legislative deadlines that need to be met and pushing the hearing date doesn’t leave time for reconsideration of the bill if it falls short of votes.
JusticeCalifornia
April 17, 2011
I wonder, on this sunny afternoon, how many families and abused children cj minimimi will ultimately have sold down the river by the time her term ends.
(From Yahoo answers: “Sold Down The River” refers to the Mississippi River. Slaves that “misbehaved” or made escape attempts were often sold to the Deep South, where punishments were harsher and slaves were treated worse. It was a method for breaking up family units and separating husbands and wives, parents and children, etc, as well as selling escapees or any other slave no longer considered worth the cost to keep. “)
While minimimi is fast becoming a self-centered joke (“Not the brightest bulb in the box, but with a thousand-watt ego”), her choice of advisors is not funny.
Not to beat a dead horse, but Marin’s Kim Turner and Verna Adams are surely laughing, and clinking glasses at their coup — not only did they destroy Marin families and children by facilitating repeated violations of state law, and then destroy evidence about destroying Marin families and children while facilitating violations of state law, Turner and Adams have now been rewarded and firmly embraced by minimimi and placed in oversight, advisory leadership positions.
Seriously, WTF????
So, here is minimimi’s theme song— and it as sad, twisted and dysfunctional as minimimi and the advisors she is purposefully surrounding herself with, while distraught families and abused children can only wonder why. Hey cj minimimi, turn up the TV, no one listening will suspect. . .you are fast becoming less than zero, for embracing those who have knowingly and gleefully harmed so many families and children, and for supporting retaliation against those who complain.
Less Than Zero– by Elvis Costello
Calling Mister Oswald with the swastika tattoo
There is a vacancy waiting in the English voodoo
Carving V for vandal on the guilty boy’s head
When he’s had enough of that maybe you’ll take him to bed
To teach him he’s alive before he wishes he was dead
Turn up the TV, no one listening will suspect
Even your mother won’t detect it, no your father won’t know
They think that I’ve got no respect but everything means less than zero
Hey, ooh hey, hey, ooh hey
Oswald and his sister are doing it again
They’ve got the finest home movies that you have ever seen
They’ve got a thousand variations, every service with a smile
They’re gonna take a little break, and they’ll be back after a while
Well, I hear that South America is coming into style
Turn up the TV, no one listening will suspect
Even your mother won’t detect it, no your father won’t know
They think that I’ve got no respect but everything means less than zero
Hey, ooh hey, hey, ooh hey
A pistol was still smoking, a man lay on the floor
Mister Oswald said, he had an understanding with the law
He said, he heard about a couple living in the USA
He said, they traded in their baby for a Chevrolet
Let’s talk about the future now we’ve put the past away
Turn up the TV, no one listening will suspect
Even your mother won’t detect it, no your father won’t know
They think that I’ve got no respect but everything means less than zero
Hey, ooh hey, hey, ooh hey
Mrs. Kramer
April 18, 2011
I study how information moves to influence decision impacting public policy. Here is my two cents — for what it is worth.
The term what what they are doing is “Influence through Ignorance”, meaning it is not he who knows and can evidence the most information who controls the outcome of a decision making process. Rather it is he who controls what information is considered by decision makers who controls the outcome. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080324130159.htm
Studying to understand how Influence through Ignorance is applied to set policies that adversely impact the public is called “Agnotology”. It is the study of culturally induced ignorance or doubt.
A similar word from the same Greek roots, agnoiology, means “the science or study of ignorance, which determines its quality and conditions” or “the doctrine concerning those things of which we are necessarily ignorant” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnotology
In order to effectively combat Influence through Ignorance, one does not need to prove that they are right, only that the other side is wrong.
IF one tries to combat Influence through Ignorance by presenting their side and more information in support of their side, they inadvertantly make it look like a legitimate debate and detract from issue of ignorance being used to influence decision. (Ignorance being willfully applied is the REAL issue.)
Simply put: The Judicial Council has been given carte blanche use of tax dollars to autonomously run the courts with no oversight. They have established a track record of misuse of the tax dollars adverse to the public’s best interest when given carte blanche, autonomous control with no oversight.
Mantra:
“New government code will protect the public by curtailing the Judicial Council’s ability to autonomously misuse tax dollars.” (Word Count: 18)
Its a common known rule of marketing that one must repeat a concept three times before what they are saying becomes an acceptable concept in the mind of a decision maker.
Keep the message simple. Play offense against their position. Not defense of yours.
Michael Paul
April 18, 2011
There’s a perfectly acceptable alternative to this hypothesis of the Judicial Council and AOC’s positions are influenced through ignorance (though when you boil it down, it means the same thing…) and that is Truthiness.
Truthiness is a “truth” that a person claims to know intuitively “from the gut” without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination or facts.
Truthiness explains so much.
wendy darling
April 18, 2011
Published on The Recorder, the on-line publication of CalLaw:
A Bench Divided, By Cheryl Miller and Kate Moser
The state’s judges are on the warpath. Can the California Judges Association find them common ground …
The article is subscription access only, so perhaps someone out there with subscription access to The Recorder could share a synopsis of the article … ?
Long live the ACJ.
Mrs. Kramer
April 18, 2011
6PM PST 4/18~Sharon Kramer~Truth Squad Radio Special Broadcast~Corrupt Workers Comp System & Corrupt CA Courts
Yes. “Truthiness” is founded on statements that not corroborated by evidence. They can be just as detrimental to bringing change as willful “Influence through Ignorance”. This is because Truthiness serve to confuse a matter based on hearsay that may be spread by those fighting against Influence through Ignorance. (aka gossip).
Now is your chance to put your efforts to rid Truthiness and Influential Ignorance from the CA legal system, in your own words, forever in the archives of the Internet.
This is a call-in friendly program. First half is of the fraud in health and workers comp policy over the mold issue. Second half is of the fraud in the courts that aids the fraud in policy to continue.
Truth Squad Radio: Whistleblower Sharon Noonan Kramer Exposes Government Corruption, Collusion and Fraud
Join us for a special broadcast Monday, April 18, 2011!
Whistleblower Sharon Noonan Kramer exposes government collusion, corruption, and fraud
in the workman’s compensation industry.
Sharon Kramer is a researcher and whistleblower. She exposes how the scientific fraud that “moldy buildings do no harm” marketed its way into US public health policy, thereby allowing the dismissal of injured parties’ insurance claims.
She has been published in medical journals, such as the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, and has given numerous interviews exposing this deceit. She was also involved in causing a federal audit of the issue, that is helping to reshape policy on a federal level.
Sharon is a Whistleblower who has been faced with corruption in the California judicial system at the highest levels that works to keep the fraud going in the private sector health policy on behalf of the affiliates of the US Chamber of Commerce.
Tonight, Sharon will discuss the fraud, how it came to be policy, as well as who was involved and what it has cost her and her family for daring to speak out and expose the fraud.
6:00 pm PST
8:00 pm CST
9:00 pm EST
Call-in Number: (917) 388-4520
URL: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/marti-oakley
************
Is there news in your area no one is reporting? Want to be a guest?
Give us a call on SKYPE: 320-281-0585 or email us at truthsquadradio@gmail.com
GMOs? We don’t need no stinkin’ GMOs!
Barbara H. Peterson
http://farmwars.info
Judicial Council Watcher
April 21, 2011
“Leaders of the California Judges Association decided not to issue any response letter to AB 1208. A survey last month revealed deep division over the bill within the organization, which adopted a neutral position on AB 1208 earlier this month. After a conference call Tuesday, the CJA’s executive committee agreed not to send Calderon a letter, given members’ polarized views.”
We congratulate the CJA’s executive committee for not selling out their members. We also congratulate the members of the ACJ who are also CJA members and kept the pressure up.
Judicial Council Watcher
April 22, 2011
Dear Members and Friends:
Yesterday was a remarkable day for the Alliance of California Judges. The Los Angeles Superior Court, after a month of polling its over 400 judges, voted overwhelmingly to support AB1208, the Trial Court Rights Act of 2011.
The LA Superior Court has a large elected representative Executive Committee. Last month, the Presiding Judge instructed its member to poll the judges in LA re: AB1208. After vigorous debate, including power-point demonstrations, videos, and written materials on both sides of the issue, the committee met to discuss its findings. The executive committee found, in its words, “overwhelming support” for AB 1208. Based upon that, the committee voted unanimously, with one abstention, for the following resolution:
“Having heard and considered the overwhelming support if its bench officers for AB1208, the Los Angeles Superior Court Executive Committee votes that the Los Angeles Superior Court support AB1208.”
We are very proud of the the Los Angeles Court, and thank them for supporting the bill. We especially thank the ACJ members in LA for so effectively making the case for AB1208. Further, we extend our thanks to LA’s Presiding Judge Lee Edmon for encouraging a wide-ranging and in depth debate on the matter. Everyone had a true opportunity to be heard, and made the most of it.
A story about the vote appears in the Courthouse News Service at:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/04/20/35969.htm
A similar story about San Mateo’s near-unanimous support is found at
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/04/20/35965.htm
We note that the LA vote led almost immediately to predictable arguments. Here is an excerpt from a story in the LA Metropolitan News which ran today. (The reference to “signatories” refers to a letter in opposition that Judge O’Malley, reappointed to the Judicial Council for a new three year term this week, has been circulating.)
“Contra Costa Superior Court Judge Mary Ann O’Malley, a past chair of the Trial Court Presiding Judges Advisory Committee and of of the signatories, said yesterday that an additional 16 individuals have since joined in the letter. She remarked that she was “not surprised” Los Angeles has voted to support AB1208, since “my feeling is that this bill benefits Los Angeles to the detriment of the rest of the courts statewide.”
There is little doubt that had the LA court instead voted to oppose the bill, that this would be offered as evidence of a lack of statewide support. The tactic of “divide and conquer” is not a new one. We are confident the judges of this state recognize the need to respect the views of our 58 independent trial courts, and will resist using regional differences in an attempt to stoke resentment. Members of the council will, we hope, be especially mindful of this. The entire story can be accessed at http://www.metnews.com/
Finally, we thought you might be interested in how the internal council committee called the Policy Coordination and Liaison Committee came to oppose AB1208. We are confused as to what criteria they utilized. Prior to their telephonic vote on 3/30, only one Judicial Council advisory committee was consulted, that being the Trial Court Presiding Judges and Court Executives Advisory Committee (TCPJAC/CEAC). The minutes of the 3/21 meeting of that committee’s Joint Legislation Working Group recommended that “the Judicial Council take no position on the bill, but directed (AOC) staff to inform the council of the strong concerns shared by nearly all on the working group regarding governance issues and the balance of control between the AOC and the trial courts.”
Notwithstanding this action, PCLC voted to “oppose, but support the process developed by the Chief Justice with the establishment of the Strategic Evaluation Committee to address branch governance issues.” This is strange, because the SEC committee’s charge does not address the matters covered by AB 1208, as far as we can see.
Speaking of the SEC committee, it has already generated some press interest. One of its advisory members is the president of the National Center for State Courts. The Daily Journal reported this week that the NCSC has ongoing contractual relationships with the AOC, to the tune of several hundred thousand dollars. Further, the AOC pays dues to the NCSC of roughly $500,000.00 per year. In addition, the parent company of Deloitte LLC, the company handling the CCMS project, is a long time contributor to the NCSC, and up until 2005 was their auditor. In 2009, NCSC inducted the AOC Director into its prestigious Warren Burger Society. And so on. According to the Daily Journal, the president of the NCSC will remain on the committee, but will recuse herself from certain discussions.
Thank you for your continued support.
Directors,
Alliance of California Judges
wendy darling
April 22, 2011
Long live the ACJ!
Judicial Council Watcher
April 22, 2011
With respect to the SEC committee being entrusted with a function it was not charged with performing, this holds true of the accountability committee as well. As long as these committees are spoonfed by the AOC and their strings are pulled just right by the JC the results will continue to be predictable.
No committee is charged specifically with cleaning up the AOC or holding anyone accountable for mismanagement. Rather, they’re all based on the premise of the “big lie”. We’re telling you we’re doing something about it. You don’t want to have the untoward appearance of disagreeing with us because no matter how right you may be, we have our own flavor of spin and can create yet another committee.
JusticeCalifornia
April 22, 2011
Is it just me, or does there appear to be a touch of madness in the CJ/AOC’s persistent re-arranging of deck chairs as the ship goes down?
And who is paying for all those bench members to participate in the madness, instead of doing their paid jobs? Oh yeah, we are.
wendy darling
April 22, 2011
More flapdoodle from the Ministry of Truthiness . . .
Mrs. Kramer
April 22, 2011
It appears to be more than just a touch of madness. Seems to be full blown insanity that they could even think of feigning ignorance to the fact that status quo has not worked and will not work. Seems to me that when all is said and done it comes down to two questions:
#1. How many tax dollars does it take to change a light bulb?
and
#2. In the public’s best interest, who should decide how many tax dollars it takes to change a light bulb?
(Anyone who has willfully used tax dollars to illegally hire unlicensed contractors to change light bulbs should immediately be disqualified from eligibility of being considered an “In the public’s best interest” answer to question #2.)